0
0

Foreclose or let houseowner squat?


               
2010 Jun 11, 5:34am   16,960 views  32 comments

by kimtitu   follow (0)  

As I've read the news in recent months, strategic default is on the rise at alarming rate. Banks have been letting defaulted house owners stay in the house for years without paying the mortgage. As the number of squatters increases, banks' loan portfolio performance will decrease. From one of the news articles (don't remember the source now) squatters even demand that the bank reduce principal or take the house. They refuse to pay the mortgage if the bank does not reduce the principal to the current market value of the house. If the banks foreclose on the house, banks take a haircut too. What do you think the banks are going to do? Start to foreclose on non-paying mortgages or let the squatters live free?

#housing

Comments 1 - 1 of 32       Last »     Search these comments

1   SFace   @   2010 Jun 11, 5:38am  

What do you think the banks are going to do? Start to foreclose on non-paying mortgage or letting squatters live free?

They will increase staff signifcantly and accelerate the process to reduce squat time. Once you missed a couple of payments and they know the home is underwater, they'll never see another payment again.

Comments 1 - 1 of 32       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   users   suggestions   gaiste